Do Venturi-style upgrades work?
At the Miami Grand Prix, Formula 1 teams brought a substantial wave of aerodynamic upgrades, with nearly every technical department submitting extensive FIA update documentation. Mercedes, Haas, and Aston Martin were the notable exceptions, choosing to hold back major visible developments.
One of the most interesting aerodynamic concepts seen this season is a design philosophy that appears closer to classic Venturi-inspired thinking. Alpine was among the first teams to showcase this interpretation, seemingly reacting quickly to the new aerodynamic restrictions aimed at limiting outwash in order to improve overtaking and close racing in dirty air. McLaren has also embraced a similar concept, and it is now attracting growing attention throughout the paddock.
Red Bull also appears to have unlocked performance through its revised design direction. Rival engineers had openly admitted their curiosity about the updated RB22 package, saying: “We’re interested to see what they’ve done.”
Max Verstappen’s car underwent significant revision after showing clear instability issues in its early outings. During vehicle rotation, turbulence management between the front and rear sections made the RB22 extremely difficult to handle. The reigning world champion had already highlighted an unpredictable dynamic balance during testing, and given how highly Red Bull values the Dutch driver’s feedback as arguably the team’s most precise performance sensor, it became obvious that Pierre Waché’s technical group needed to react quickly.
The front-row result in Miami offered encouraging evidence. Max Verstappen once again showed his ability to make a substantial difference over a single lap, creating a notable gap compared to Isack Hadjar.
What seems increasingly clear is that Venturi-style sidepod concepts, built around a strong downwash effect, can still effectively shield the rear wing from turbulence generated by the front wheels while opening valuable aerodynamic performance opportunities. More broadly, these solutions help maintain cleaner airflow toward the rear of the car through the sculpted channels above the radiators, feeding both the diffuser and the aerodynamic devices around the rear wheel corners—areas responsible for generating a huge proportion of total downforce.
McLaren remains the benchmark
In this area, McLaren appears to have re-established itself as the benchmark team. The Woking-based squad has preserved two critical strengths already seen in previous cars: extremely efficient cooling, which allows the engine cover to remain remarkably clean even in high-temperature conditions, and outstanding integration between the front wing, suspension architecture, and front floor design.
McLaren’s front wing elements also feature an exceptionally aggressive outwash philosophy that remains difficult for rivals to replicate. While Ferrari has worked effectively on rear-end aerodynamic innovation, the same can certainly be said of McLaren when it comes to front-end efficiency.
At Maranello, Ferrari has chosen a more neutral route with its sidepod architecture, avoiding particularly extreme solutions in either direction. However, that does not necessarily mean this philosophy will remain unchanged, as further evolution later in the season remains entirely possible.
Audi’s alternative concept
Then there is Audi, which has introduced one of the most unconventional concepts seen so far. The R26, designed under James Key’s technical leadership, follows a philosophy that runs directly opposite to Alpine, McLaren, or even Adrian Newey’s preferred aerodynamic principles: keeping airflow as low as possible while eliminating the traditional side undercut.
The vertically narrow cooling inlets allow engineers to exploit the entire sidepod excavation to push hot air outward, as far away as possible from the rear aerodynamic structures. It is undoubtedly an interesting and original solution. While it may not appear particularly elegant visually, it still looks somewhat raw in terms of overall efficiency. That means it could either evolve significantly—or ultimately be abandoned.
Mercedes watches and waits
Mercedes has already confirmed that major upgrades will arrive in Montreal in response to rival developments.
It will be fascinating to see whether the team has simply been conservative, relying on the advantage it believes it has already built, or whether it is genuinely following a small-step development philosophy focused on fine details. The current Mercedes already appears to be built around exceptionally clean aerodynamic surfaces and a highly stable aerodynamic platform, reducing the need for dramatic visible changes.
The floor design reveals the car’s aerodynamic philosophy
The floor fence design reveals a great deal about a car’s overall aerodynamic concept. The taller lateral barriers introduced by the regulations were specifically created to contain the dirty wake generated by rotating front wheels under steering load. This marks a clear philosophical shift compared to previous regulations, even when large flow diverters near the wheel corners were still permitted.
The so-called “shutter-style” openings, limited to a maximum of three upper sections, still leave engineers considerable room for interpretation depending on the aerodynamic concept built around the front wing.
Fundamentally, two main approaches exist. One is to create a high-pressure zone between the front wing and the sidepods, forcing large volumes of air outward through high-speed corners. The other is to use the upper sections to project accumulated airflow upward, generating greater vertical aerodynamic load.
This latter solution appears especially effective for producing local downforce, but it also brings greater risk if the expelled airflow reattaches too early, potentially interfering with rear axle performance.
Reverse wings: Ferrari or Red Bull?
The designers’ objective was essentially the same: rotate the upper wing element to widen the slot gap and generate lift reduction. This helps unload the rear by several aerodynamic kilograms, improving top speed in DRS and straight-line acceleration zones.
Ferrari introduced a particularly sophisticated system using a side-mounted actuator and return spring. It is a refined and efficient solution, though likely more complex to optimise. The key advantage lies in a rear wing that remains highly effective even when the system is not activated, while the rotational movement may also offer a degree of aerodynamic benefit under braking.
Red Bull, by contrast, opted for a more traditional reverse-wing solution using a central actuator, but one that appears exceptionally robust and more aggressive in slot opening. This is possible because the 2026 regulations do not prohibit raising the flap beyond the lateral profile limits.
However, the true advantage may not be the visually dramatic “XL slot” itself, but rather the ability to run a larger main-plane chord in the closed configuration, increasing the amount of aerodynamic load available when maximum downforce is needed.
Leave a Reply