MPH: The final battleground of F1's current ground-effect cars
F1
As this generation of Formula 1 regulations comes to a close, teams are finding the trade-off between low and high-speed configurations to be as tricky as it is important, as Mark Hughes explains
Finding more performance in the final year of the current rules has been a balancing act
In the final year of these F1 regulations, the differences in car quality is playing out in a very distinct way. As understanding has increased, the demands have changed and it’s this which has driven the changing of the colours at the front of the field over the past 12 months. The pattern which emerged in the latter part of ’24 has only been made more emphatic in the opening events of this season.
In the build-up to this weekend’s Japanese Grand Prix, Fernando Alonso was talking about Aston Martin’s prospects given what he has learned about the car’s significant limitations in the first two races. “Probably slow-speed corners is still a weakness of last year’s car and this year’s car… Hopefully here in Japan, sector one will be good. But Bahrain, Monaco, these kinds of circuits are going to be a real challenge for us.” His prediction about sector one was spot on, the Aston the fastest of all through there, but mediocre over the lap.
Max Verstappen might have pointed out the same about his Red Bull. Although the Aston and his car are on a different scale of competitiveness, the general trait – much better in high-speed than slow – conforms to the same pattern. The RB21’s stiff rear end isn’t working well at low speed but gives good platform control at high.
The trick, of course, is to get the low-speed compliance and grip while retaining the good high-speed platform. You will have to compromise at one or both ends of that spectrum to find the optimum. This is what McLaren has done so effectively in the past few months of development as these ground-effect generation have reached their late maturity.
Asked about the limitation of the RB21, Verstappen replied: “I think it’s a combination of a lot of things. It depends also on the corner speed, the tarmac, the tyres overheating, bumps, kerbs. There’s a lot of different things, and in some tracks some bits are more limiting than others and it depends a lot on the track layout. But from what I see out there, it is a little bit more nervous, a little bit more… I would say, unstable in different corner phases, maybe? Maybe more than some of my team-mates have been used to before. In some bits of course we are clearly faster than where they came from, but to just piece it all together probably is a bit harder.”
Max Verstappen during practice at the Japanese GP
Red Bull
Asked if that weakness changed through the corner: “You try to work on one bit, then it might shift a little bit in the other… it’s not easy, let’s say, to find the middle ground.”
It all paints a picture of where the battleground is as the teams try to squeeze the last drop of performance from these cars. That battleground has moved around as they have found and fixed previous limitations. Now, saying your car is ‘good in high speed’ is effectively just saying it’s a mediocre car. It’s the new ‘we’re fast on the straight’ because you haven’t got enough downforce. Now if you’re fast in the high speed it’s often because you’re having to run too stiff a rear for the low-speed to be competitive.
Two years ago Verstappen qualified his Red Bull on pole here by 0.6sec ahead of Oscar Piastri’s McLaren. That gives some idea of the scale of McLaren’s progress since then and it’s interesting to revisit what McLaren’s Andrea Stella said at that time: “We were pretty certain the Red Bull was going to be the quickest car here considering the track layout. They are quicker in pretty much every speed range. If you look at the overlays Verstappen gains in every type of corner, which is quite remarkable and gives us a measure of how much work we have ahead of us. Six-tenths is a significant amount and makes sure we keep our feet on the ground.”
Red Bull has reshuffled its drivers and changed development direction but its car is still too slow and months behind the progress of F1 rivals, writes Mark Hughes. Max Verstappen's uncertain future makes the way forward even murkier
By
Mark Hughes
Red Bull hasn’t got slower since then; it’s just not made the gains of the others around. As McLaren surged, Red Bull’s development curve stalled part-way through last year. That direction had basically hit a brick wall, something which was recognised during the Monza weekend. Ever since then, it’s been a process of reversing the development direction which had made it imbalanced. This year’s RB21 represents the stripped-back foundation on which the team is trying to add load without losing balance.
“You’re trying to get your car as balanced as you can make it and we’re one to two tenths off the quickest car,” says the team’s chief engineer Paul Monaghan. “Last year’s cars had some flaws and we’ve addressed those flaws – quite significantly and quite well without giving away much lap time. Now we’ve got to try to get this one to be a bit better. So we just need to find a few hundredths in each corner.” Simple to say…
Meanwhile in that trade-off between low and high-speed performance, Ferrari may have found itself in a tricky position. It’s early days but there are questions about whether it is being forced to run at a higher ride height than intended as oscillations at high fuel levels give excessive plank wear. The Hamilton plank disqualification in China in combination with his victory from pole in the Sprint race (when loaded with around 65kg less fuel) is a neat fit with this theory. Team boss Frederic Vasseur insists there is nothing fundamental in the layout of the car which will prevent a more flexible set-up window to be found.
But is there a sting in the tail for this final ground effect generation?
