Ferrari SF-26

[matteosc]

I would add that it is possible that the good performance of Silverstone is due (in part) to how efficient this rear wing is when closed.

Am I correct that you meant “open” here, not “closed”?

No it's bc in Silverstone many high-speed straight sections of the track were not Straight Mode zones (like out of Copse or from T1 to T3), so closed-wing efficiency mattered more than on other tracks. No wing design is optimized for that and to claim that helped Ferrari is a bit of an a posteriori guess based on the performance from the weekend, but yes, he meant "closed", not "open"

I did mean "closed", but I disagree with your interpretation. I think one reason why Ferrari developed his version of the macarena wing was to remove the DRS pod and to increase the wing efficiency. I know people will say that the endplates are thicker, but very little load is generated there Most of the load is generated at the center and removing the pod should increase efficiency (i.e. reducing drag). This was highlighted from before the season, so it is not a posteriori guess.
So yes, I think they did optimize the wing for closed mode.

[matteosc]

I would add that it is possible that the good performance of Silverstone is due (in part) to how efficient this rear wing is when closed.

No it's bc in Silverstone many high-speed straight sections of the track were not Straight Mode zones (like out of Copse or from T1 to T3), so closed-wing efficiency mattered more than on other tracks. No wing design is optimized for that and to claim that helped Ferrari is a bit of an a posteriori guess based on the performance from the weekend, but yes, he meant "closed", not "open"

It's not possible to deduce closed wing aero efficiency from the publicly available data due to deployment differences. Also, in my opinion, those teams that use the macarena wing are more likely to run higher load (and less efficient) closed wings because flipping the wing over (bigger DRS effect) allows them to compensate more.

Well, we can guess, as we are guessing all other data, right? They may indeed run higher downforce because of the bigger drag reduction warranted in SLM, but that does not mean that you cannot improve efficiency of the closed wing at the same time.

Ferrari introduced a new PU with more power and a better hybrid system. This has likely contributed to their performance in Silverstone. The PU upgrade was masked in Austria because of overheating.

That may well be the case, but I do not think their PU update was that significant. We will see in future races I guess!

[nico5]

They may indeed run higher downforce because of the bigger drag reduction warranted in SLM, but that does not mean that you cannot improve efficiency of the closed wing at the same time.

The whole point of this ruleset regarding RWs is to have maximum df in corner-mode and minimum drag in straight-mode.
Efficiency in corner-mode is not really something you care about BECAUSE it comes at the cost of maximum downforce. I think everyone is maxing out the regs' box for RWs, so differences lie mostly in camber which is not exactly efficient downforce, and the kind of thing reversing the flap works well to cancel out in straight-mode (therefore you could potentially afford more, but it's very much a guess).
All of this doesn't mean Ferrari's wing isn't necessarily better in said sections of the track, but with all the variables and adaptations and values shifting in 2026, to attribute this advantage based on a sample of one race feels premature.

What is interesting in Spa, though, is that it's the first time (that I remember) FIA has drivers close and then reopen flaps at high speed, and in two segments (Eau Rouge and Blanchimont), so it will be interesting to see if Ferrari pays any price for the 270° flap rotation.