Deep Dive - @ScuderiaFerrari SF-25 revised rear suspension: Besides the likely (hidden) mods to spring/dampers & their actuation, upper WB fwd arm inboard pick up was lowered by ~50 mm, resulting in the roll ctr. ht. increase of ~20 mm to ~60 mm. Kinematic analysis comparison:
2
14
173
Replies
The new suspension kinematics maintains a relatively neutral camber gain curve (with -1.75 deg. static setting) which is typical for rear suspension requiring keeping rear tires square to the road surface to ensure maximum tire contact for traction during acceleration…
1
1
24
Bump steer is slightly increased at the extremes of bump and rebound, while lateral scrub peaks shifted from bounce travel to rebound travel…
1
1
21
The lateral instant center was raised ~40 mm to ~310 mm. As the IC height is below the wheel center, this design actually provides a slight pro-squat design at ~ -3.5 deg (pretty much unchanged) though some anti-squat restoring torque is present if CG below Fwb line-of-action…
1
1
25
Braking anti-rise effect, though, is noticeably increased with the reaction vector angle basically doubling from ~12 deg. to ~26 deg. So while it was assumed that Merc and Ferrari changed their rear suspension to increase anti-squat, it’s mostly the anti-rise that was targeted.
1
2
25
In @autosport article, @MercedesAMGF1 trackside engineering director Andrew Shovlin talks anti-rise (referred to as anti-lift here—bit of a misnomer) effect of angled rear suspension upper wishbone with no mention of anti-squat:
1
2
17