Following his sensational lap in Saturday's qualifying which saw Charles Leclerc claim a shock pole position for Ferrari, the Monegasque endured a heartbreaking result at the Hungarian Grand Prix despite his impressive pace during his first two stints of the race. F1Technical's senior writer Balazs Szabo delivers his latest analysis in his column branded as F1MATHS.
Loic Serra, 2024 Bahrain pre-season test
Extra plank wear is not a cause but a consequence. The structure of the rear axle does not allow the expected stiffness, which forces the height to be increased in closed park to protect itself with 100kg on board. The main suspect is the rear suspension, homologated in July last year, along with the new gearbox.
The Haas shares mechanical parts and has performed well since the Australian disaster, however it does not have the performance load platform nor the sophisticated aerodynamics of the Ferrari. In other words, the SF-25 struggles with excessive softness that is compromising its operation. It looks like something already seen, for example, on the old Mercedes in the past year. The Rossa under the right conditions can generate much more load than the previous car, the sprint showed what the car could do with 35 kg of gasoline. Qualifying after three hours again erased expectations, less downforce in corners and more rear instability.
Loic Serra arrived in October so relatively late on the 677 project. The French DT has returned to Maranello and is taking action to correct its effectiveness and reliability but clearly it is too early to formulate a solution or its timing. The problem is not easy to solve, engineers are also working on some areas of update that should introduce new parts from Bahrain.
So technically the gearbox theory floating around after Australia was correct.The main suspect is the rear suspension, homologated in July last year along with the new gearbox casing.
May have been correct, but for the wrong reasons.ScuderiaLeo wrote: ↑24 Mar 2025, 15:19Something else to note is that AR article is signed by Duchessa, Donadoni, and Giuliana. All three putting their name on it indicates they're confident about the contents.
So technically the gearbox theory floating around after Australia was correct.The main suspect is the rear suspension, homologated in July last year along with the new gearbox casing.
"I just dont buy it". Well most people who argue a position never admit when their argument isn't good, so that's not surprising to hear.Hammerfist wrote: ↑24 Mar 2025, 01:07I just dont buy it. Like i said cars with similar damage have shown race winning pace in the past and have won races. If charles did suffer a loss then he was likely faster than the mclarens, which is ridiculous to even think that might be true.Seanspeed wrote: ↑24 Mar 2025, 00:27Well I think it's probably more accurate that Lewis was simply strangely off-the-pace in the race rather than Leclerc being strangely fast.Hammerfist wrote: ↑23 Mar 2025, 23:44Fact of the matter is leclerc was slower than hamilton all weekend until he had the frony wing damage. So it would be odd for him to have lost a lot of performance due to damage while still becoming comfortably faster than hamilton all race long.
Ive always been intrigued by the lack of performance loss from a damaged front wing. Max won vegas 23 wirh a similarly damaged fronti wing. Hamilton won jeddah in 21 with a similarly damaged front wing. Thats just off the top of my head. Im sure there are many more examples. It often doesn’t affect performance at all.
Lewis in the Sprint race versus Feature race was clearly a wild difference.
And there's no way at all that missing a front wing endplate on a front-limited track like China didn't hurt performance. You could see Leclerc's performance through T9-10 especially was just dismal and that's exactly where such a fault would show up.
The interest isn't about how much pollution F1 cars themselves make, it's to incorporate road relevance for the engine manufacturers themselves so ordinary cars become more performant and emission efficient using lessons from F1 development. THEY are the ones who pushed for these hybrid powertrains, and it's a big reason Audi even decided to get involved, or why Honda is formally coming back.
Seanspeed wrote: ↑24 Mar 2025, 16:46The interest isn't about how much pollution F1 cars themselves make, it's to incorporate road relevance for the engine manufacturers themselves so ordinary cars become more performant and emission efficient using lessons from F1 development. THEY are the ones who pushed for these hybrid powertrains, and it's a big reason Audi even decided to get involved, or why Honda is formally coming back.
I dont see much chance F1 goes away from this as far too much momentum has occurred towards the new regs and powertrains by now. Ferrari will need to plan this year based on the expectation that 2026 will go ahead as normal.
