Mattia Binotto, Ferrari, Imola, 2021

2022 car has been Ferrari’s development priority since January – Binotto

RaceFans Round-up

Posted on

| Written by

In the round-up: Ferrari team principal Mattia Binotto says few further updates will arrive for this year’s car as they are already focusing their development effort on next season.

In brief

Ferrari focused on 2022 since year began

With extensive new technical regulations arriving for the 2022 F1 season, all teams face a balancing act of when to commit their resources to next year’s championship.

The decision has been made more complicated by the introduction of both new Financial regulations – the budget cap – and an aerodynamic development handicap. The latter allows teams which finished lower down the constructors’ championship last year to do more development during this season.

Speaking after Sunday’s Emilia-Romagna Grand Prix, Binotto said Ferrari was sufficiently satisfied with the progress it has made since its poor 2020 campaign to throw its weight behind a major development push for next season. As it finished sixth out of 10 teams last year, Ferrari will be permitted more development time than the majority of its rivals.

“I think the car for 2021 is where we were expecting, so good correlations with our data,” said Binotto. “Which is great.

“Is it time to switch to 2022? We already switched from January. So the team is already focussed on next year. We will have still some development on 2021 but that’s not our priority.”

McLaren Technology Centre sold by team

McLaren has completed the sale-and-leaseback of the McLaren Group Headquarters, which includes the distinctive McLaren Technology Centre which is home to its Formula 1 team, in a 20-year, £170 million deal. Global Net Lease confirmed yesterday it is the buyer.

GNL CEO James Nelson said the Norman Foster-designed buxilding was a “world-class facility” which is “the type of mission-critical, net-leased properties that make up the GNL portfolio.”

Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and go ad-free

Social media

Notable posts from Twitter, Instagram and more:

Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and go ad-free

Comment of the day

There were two good reasons to user a rolling restart instead of a standing one last weekend, says @Stefmeister:

The bigger reason not to do a standing start for me wouldn’t so much have been the damp patches on the run to Tamburello, but more the damp patches on the grid. You would have had some drivers starting on a dry spot and others on a damp spot which would likely have resulted in a good chunk of the grid been severely disadvantaged.

Happy birthday!

Happy birthday to Vincent, The Kef, Cyberaxiom and Dylan Mota!

If you want a birthday shout-out tell us when yours is via the contact form or adding to the list here.

On this day in F1

  • 30 years ago today Arie Luyendyk won the third round of the CART IndyCar series on the Phoenix oval ahead of Bobby Rahal

Author information

Keith Collantine
Lifelong motor sport fan Keith set up RaceFans in 2005 - when it was originally called F1 Fanatic. Having previously worked as a motoring...

Got a potential story, tip or enquiry? Find out more about RaceFans and contact us here.

Posted on Categories RaceFans Round-upTags , , ,

Promoted content from around the web | Become a RaceFans Supporter to hide this ad and others

  • 48 comments on “2022 car has been Ferrari’s development priority since January – Binotto”

    1. someone or something
      21st April 2021, 2:38

      What’s Brundle on about? Russell should’ve waited for a less risky move? Less risky than, say, picking up a tow and moving onto the racing line on the tracks literally only overtaking spot at the end of a long straight?
      I honestly have no idea what could be less risky.
      As much as I normally respect Brundle, that comment was unnecessary. It ticks all the boxes of an experienced former driver’s wisdom, that’s just how they talk when they know best. But in essence, without the benefit of hindsight, it’s pure rubbish.
      What if Bottas and Russel hadn’t clashed? Would Brundle have felt the need to tell Russel he shouldn’t have done that, too risky?
      Well, he might’ve, but people around him would probably want to check his temperature.

      1. … if you no longer go for a gap that exists, you are no longer a racing driver…

        Russell’s reaction in the heat of the moment is something he needs to learn from, but other than that, it was simply a racing incident that ended with both out of the race.

      2. I’ve seen most of the passes done on that straight and all were done in wet and dry without incident. In my opinion the difference is Bottas wasn’t expecting to be passed, and probably the least by a Williams, so just stayed on the racing line which diminished the road for Russell and he strayed marginally wide.

      3. Well if you don’t believe he should or could have waited for a less risky opportunity, then surely you must expect that he should take responsibility for any outcome from his actions instead of blaming the other driver.

        1. someone or something
          21st April 2021, 9:48

          I think your comment would make more sense if I had agreed that the move was (too) risky. In that case, it would make sense to “take responsibility for any outcome”. Not so in a situation that could hardly have been less risky. In that case, there simply is no logical connection to assuming responsibility.
          That notwithstanding, I wasn’t a fan of his behaviour after the accident, either.

      4. An uncanny reminder from the past that an inexperienced Williams having just scored his first points in F1 tries to pass a Mercedes on the outside, taking the far more experienced driver by surprise, resulting in an accident. Watch from 4.20 then compare and contrast.

        There’s even another connection in the pits shot following..

      5. Exactly, there is literally no safer overtaking spot than the main straight.

      6. someone or something I agree with your stance and I note GR has only apologized for his behaviour afterwards, but not for the pass attempt. I still don’t know what else he could have done with that head of steam he had, and to me backing out as Brundle put it would have been more the type of timid move VB would make. GR was actually using his Williams to race and showed why he would be the far better heir apparent to LH eventually. As in, starting next year alongside LH until he retires.

      7. I at least commend Brundle for stop blaming Bottas.

        1. Well Bottas has blame. I’ve watched all the overtakes on the straight. All were similar. So for one, Russell was right to do it. And secondly all but Bottas gave a bit more space. As said before Bottas should not be in that car. He has not enough skill level in traffic. He should have stayed at Williams. Thats from a spectator perspective. From a team boss perspective he is ideal. Mediocre, not complaining, the car will bring in the points. But not this year. They kept him one season too long and it is going to cost them.

    2. McLaren selling the Technology Centre makes me sad. I hope they are able to buy it back one day.

      1. same feeling.

      2. It’s a sale and leaseback, it is such a common practice that I can’t think of any large corporates who actually own the properties they operate out of. Having a large property on you books is dead cash, using a sale and leaseback structure frees that cash up and allows you to use it on other things (like in this case building a better wind tunnel and working on the 2022 car).

        1. @geemac but think of all the poorer uk football clubs, including mine a few years back, who did the same. It ends up being a massive burden unless you’re making money to pay the lease of course. Let’s hope this is the case.

          1. They can still join an exclusive ‘members only’ Super League.
            There are some spots open ;)

      3. Not a big deal and very common in business.
        It should not have made the racing news other than pointing out the precarious financial situation of the team.

        I was more disappointed when Williams sold their historic car collection.

      4. Renting / leasing is never cheaper than owning, that’s obviously why there are leasing companies.

        About getting funds they could have gotten loans on the property, but I guess they must already have been maxed out so this was the only way.

        For sure it was the right choice in these corona times, but it’s still not nice to think McLaren are renters at their own premises. Williams historic car collection sale was also bad.

        1. Renting / leasing is never cheaper than owning, that’s obviously why there are leasing companies.

          But as you mentioned in your second paragraph, it might be the only option to obtain funds.
          And then it could be interesting if with those funds can create more profit (or merely survival) than they lose on the rental.

          And those rental/leasing companies are currently not looking for stellar returns other than a specific risk premium (can they find another client if McLaren can’t pay).

      5. and it is a chunk of change for an f1 team. Hopefully they are just doing some financial engineering.

    3. Another driver congratulating ‘the boys’ for their work yesterday when they literally have a 99% of staff over 20 – it’s getting tiring.

      1. Another racing site focussing on ‘everything British’ for their F1 coverage these days when they literally have a global reader base – it’s getting tiring

        1. Another critical comment whilst ‘trying to be funny’ from ColdFly when there is literally so much serious stuff to discuss – just ignore it.

          1. Nah, your comments are always among the best in the comment section @coldfly !

          2. @coldfly @balue I’m reporting your comments, you Russell blamers.

          3. @coldfly
            Just keep up with the funny comments and never apologise if you’re bullied on social media. It’s really getting tiring :) Be careful too, as you might lose your job if you don’t apologize to the bullies (poor Piers Morgan).

          4. Hahah, you’re on fire

        2. So why is this global audience tuning into British sites? Must be sites like this all over the world given its a global audience. Plenty of choice for everyone I would have thought.

          1. So why is this global audience tuning into British sites?

            Must be the comment section then :P
            And some being confused by the global .net TLD.

      2. @coldfly Ageism is perfectly fine. Don’t forget old people are the Brexit and Trump voters so discrimination obviously justified.

        Also remember that even though words like guys is now a gender-neutral word, it’s still worth the effort to call out non-native English speakers who might confuse this with boys for being a sexist misogynist despite it being an expression of camaraderie and his intention really was to be inclusive, even if the calling out in reality was meant as an attack and revealed the person’s intolerance more than anything. You still get the SJW points and mention on affiliated sites.

        This could obviously not be ignored here as it’s both social justice stuff and put Verstappen in a bad light at the same time. It’s put right next to the daily isn’t-Hamilton-great messages for extra effect.

    4. Re COTD:

      I watch old races every week, started a long time ago in 2005 and I’m now reviewing 2017. This weekend it was time for the Malaysian GP. I was amazed with the coincidence of this GP being the last one Alonso was outqualified at before Emilia-Romagna 2021, but it was also nice to see that, in that GP, there was a big difference of dampness between left and right lines of the pit straight. Watch it here (I hope the link is OK). Literally nobody asked then about a rolling start for that matter, and I find this dampness thing a very strange excuse.

      For me, it’s clear that every race should have one standing start… and only one. More is gimmick. I’m sure that if damp patches in only one side of the track were present at 3:00 PM local time, standing start would still occur, so the excuse fails. Better said, I do think Masi chose rolling start because of the damp patches, but I can’t find the reasoning and choerence behind the decision.

      1. @diezcilindros,
        Always planned to do this and review all old seasons.

        Why don’t you share an observation or two in the comments of the round-up when you watched an interesting historic race.
        There are many fans here who appreciate this and add their own POV of that race.

        1. someone or something
          21st April 2021, 14:53

          I may not be diez cilindros, nor any other form of combustion engine, but I recently rewatched the 1996 Monaco Grand Prix, the race which got me hooked to F1 (because it was bonkers).
          My standout observation: I was shocked by the scarcity of available information. I do believe that there can be an excess of information, and that most of the current discontent with F1 is due to things that definitely weren’t better in the past, but simply flew under the radar.
          That being said, I found myself thirsting for more information. The gaps between the main competitors were the only somewhat reliable source of information. Seeing as the graphic of the running order was displayed in real time, adding the names of the drivers one at a time as they passed the finish line, and the gaps were huge, there was hardly any way to know what was happening behind the top 5. Also, Murray Walker and his partner regularly misidentified drivers or gave inaccurate information as to their position. It was clear they didn’t have much additional information available, and more or less just described what was happening on the screen.
          On top of that, the cameras weren’t really interested in anyone but the leader(s) of the race. Mika Salo and Mika Häkkinen, for example, battled for almost the entire race (until they were eliminated in a delightfully slapsticky pile-up), but I don’t even need to take off my shoes to count how many times I saw them on the screen. They even overtook each other, but only Häkkinen’s overtake was shown several laps later, and how Salo managed to sneak back ahead, went completely undocumented and unreported.
          So, clearly, I have come to expect a much higher standard of transparency.

          Other than that, the race was thoroughly enjoyable, and a good example of how much has changed in the meantime, without fundamentally changing the sport. With the exception of striking innovations such as hybrid engines, DRS, or the halo, the talking points concerning racing, technology, and strategy are still fundamentally the same.

          The post-race press conference was quite funny as well, because Olivier Panis’ English was so bad I wouldn’t be surprised if his replies were borderline unintelligible to anyone who doesn’t understand French.

      2. @diezcilindros I wholly agree with you for a single standing start in every race. More indeed is a gimmick or artificial randomness.

    5. COTD is spot on, but one thing re On this day in F1: How could Arie Luyendyk have been racing in IndyCar 30 years ago as a 10-year-old?

      1. I think his son – Jr – was around 10, @jerejj.
        Daddy won the Indy around that time and was already quite a bit older.

      2. I actually had dinner with Ari in 2002 following the US GP F1 at Indianapolis back then. He is the epiphany of being Dutch; after long absence from the Netherlands still good language skills and being as normal as the Dutchies like to be (no US show elements in his appearance). Simple restaurant, simple steak, wife joining him. A truly amazing and nice man.

    6. Such was the vision of Ron Dennis to have a state of the art home base. Now sold because the current owners cant find the money to sustain itself. I believe Ron Dennis had a brilliant idea. I still belive it is. Its just unfortunate that today the owners best option is to lack vision on how to raise funds. Maybe they should have taken the billion Ron put forward by the chinese consortium…

      1. It’s a sale-and-leaseback, a standard transaction for many businesses. It makes sense if the income from the building sale is invested into something with a higher return than the costs of leasing. It’s nothing about vision, it’s about financial structure.

      2. And how was Ron then going to pay back those investors then? His plan wouldn’t solve the issue, but just transfer it elsewhere.

        1. @anon It was a take over bid not a loan. Ownership would have changed.

    7. “A traditional qualifying session on Friday would set the grid for the sprint race, with the starting order for Sunday’s race determined by the outcome of Saturday’s proceedings.”

      Awesome, so millions of people who work are going to miss the regular qualifying on friday, then.

      Thanks for trying to fix whats not broken F1. Cheers.

      1. Awesome, so millions of people who work are going to miss the regular qualifying on friday, then.

        Nothing much to miss there, to be honest. I started skipping qualifying recently because I can just watch the interesting 1.5 minutes of it later. Let’s hope sprint races are going to stay, it’s about time Saturdays are going to be fixed.

        1. “I started skipping qualifying recently because I can just watch the interesting 1.5 minutes of it later.”

          Some of us think Qualifying is the more exciting part of the entire weekend.

          “Let’s hope sprint races are going to stay”

          Yeah, let’s get excited to watch the cars fart around for an hour because their 3 PU’s that have to already do 23 races now have to do an extra 230,000 km’s

          1. uh, 2,300kms, still waiting on that edit feature Keith :thumbs_up:

            1. An edit button would not solve that, @N.
              The Sprint Qualifying will replace an FP session, in which the cars run roughly the same as in the expected Qualifying Sprint.
              They will be somewhat limited though in which component to us (now they often use old parts in FP).

            2. Even if you half the number i said, that’s still a huge number over what the PU’s have to already do, when they’re pushed to their limits.

              This is just trying to solve a problem Formula 1 doesn’t have. Who in the right mind watched the race last week and thought…’hmm yeah this needs changing’

            3. This is just trying to solve a problem Formula 1 doesn’t have. Who in the right mind watched the race last week and thought…’hmm yeah this needs changing’

              You mean the race where the winner of the 1st race hour could start at pole for the 2nd part with all the rest nicely lined up behind ‘the girl’?

              If they do it like that I’d suggest they split it over 2 days, allow all cars to rejoin with all damage repaired and make the second part a bit longer :P

    8. Interesting video describing a little how F1 broadcast works:

      Topical considering last Friday’s events, although that is not mentioned.

    Comments are closed.