Che in 92 il V12 Ferrari non fosse al paro del Renault o del Honda era già noto all'epoca. Basta comparare il sviluppo incredibile fatto dalla Honda del suo V12 nel 91 con il non-sviluppo fatto alla Ferrari. Alan Henry in Autocourse lo dice e spiega il fallimento del F92 soprattuto per causa del motore (l'assenza delle valvole pneumatiche). Il problema (secondo me!) è che i problemi col V12 furono aggravati col concetto del F92: troppo drag, baricentro troppo alto (ed radiatori, ed aqua, ed olio, etc), problemi di riscaldamento. Anche Capelli, dopo parlare del chassis, lo dice: "At the beginning of the year we were revving to 13,500, and during the year we actually had to reduce the revs because the engine couldn't last the race."
Poi dire che quello che mi colpisce nel testimone di Migeot è il quanto basico, del punto di vista tecnico, è. Una oportunità sprecata di Nugnes, perchè bisonerebbe far Migeot rispondere a quello che Steve Nichols ha detto (anche su tutto il discorso della sospensione activa):
""It was great from an aerodynamic point of view and the numbers all looked good, but it wasn't for free. It was a helluva lot of extra bodywork, a lot of extra weight, a lot of extra joints with a lot of extra drag that doesn't necessarily show up in the windtunnel numbers.
"So then you had three things that were a problem with that car. Horrendous pitch sensitivity, excess weight, and finally a high centre of gravity, with the radiator full of water up high."
https://www.autosport.com/f1/feature/42 ... us-failure Sul V12 in 95, dire che nonostante la sua competitività (e Schumacher il titulo colla 412T2 lo avrebbre probabilmento vinto), la 412T2 col V10 fu subito più veloce a Fiorano.
"Ferrari’s switch to a V10 after seven years of V12s was in response to advances in materials technology making it feasible for a V10 to have close to V12 levels of friction resistance [?], despite the necessarily bigger cylinders.
In this way it could take fuller advantage of a V10’s smaller dimensions, lighter weight and better fuel economy. Renault and Honda had shown the way with their original V10s in 1989, but now technology was only making that direction even more certain.
Although the engine design was overseen by Paulo Martinelli, he was assisted by Osamu Goto, who had been instrumental in creating the Honda V10.
The engine was adapted from the preceding V12 in terms of cylinder head design in order to make a quick and reliable transition. Although virtually the same in power (around 700bhp at a slightly lower 16,000rpm) it had a better torque curve. Its cooling demands were 10% lower, enabling smaller radiators. It was less smooth than the silky V12, though, and this caused problems with the titanium gearbox casing, requiring it to be modified.
A prototype of the engine was first tried out during the 1995 season, installed in a ’95 chassis for back-to-back tests at Fiorano with that and the V12-engined car. Test driver Nicola Larini lapped the V10 car faster and it was 6km/h faster through the speed trap at the end of the straight."
https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/arti ... Y3Nl1.htmlPS. Ancora sul discorso della non-competitività del V12. Dire che nel 1999-2000 la Toyota voleva entrare in F1 col V12 (disegnato da Luca Marmorini) e che secondo il noto giornalista Ian Bamsey anche la Cosworth aveva in corso un progetto di V12 (per la Jaguar). Quindi nell'inizio del 2000 il V12 era considerato di nuovo probabilmente in grado di essere competitivo coi V10, forse a causa di sviluppo nei materiali (berilium) o electronica. La FIA, come si sa, ha pero 'banned' i V12, si diceva per pressione della Mclaren...e della Ferrari.
https://www.crash.net/f1/news/36207/1/v ... yota-entry