Charles Leclerc’s realism
In this context, the telemetry analysis of Charles Leclerc’s best lap—set on used tyres—compared to that of pole-sitter Oscar Piastri, allows us to explore key differences in driving approach and car balance. Charles had already been cautious in interviews before qualifying: in his view, the maximum possible outcome was the third row.
The final result, eleventh place, shows that even this forecast was overly optimistic. Once again, the SF-25 shows all its limitations in qualifying configuration, where precision, responsiveness in direction changes, and mechanical stability make all the difference. In the race, where kerb speeds are lower, Ferrari can partially mask some of its flaws.
We saw this in FP2, where the race pace was actually quite good. But over a single lap, the dynamics completely change. Starting from the first sector, it’s clear that the SF-25 struggles to get the new tyre working, losing over three tenths in just the opening stretch. In the first three corners, the Italian car appears unresponsive in the quick direction changes.
All the SF-25’s flaws
The front end is lazy and the car body is unstable over the kerbs. Telemetry shows that Charles Leclerc’s minimum corner speed is a full 12 km/h lower than the Australian’s. Furthermore, the McLaren demonstrates superior braking stability and excellent modulation during release: Oscar Piastri brakes later and more progressively, exploiting full trust in the rear end’s response.
Charles, on the other hand, is forced to brake earlier to avoid understeer on entry and maintain the line, but in doing so, sacrifices speed through the middle of the chicane. Moving on to medium and high-speed corners, the technical gap widens further. In corners like Villeneuve and Piratella, which are taken around 190–240 km/h, the Ferrari driver loses 17 and 13 km/h respectively.
In terms of lap time, that’s nearly two tenths lost per corner—an enormous difference. This gap is mostly down to dynamic balance and how effectively downforce is translated to the track. McLaren manages to be stable and quick both in fast sections and technical ones. This balance proves that the MCL39 can adapt smoothly to all types of corners.
Ferrari struggles over kerbs, traction suffers
Continuing the lap, another section where the Ferrari has struggled since the start of the weekend is the Variante Alta. Here, the car’s nervousness over the crest and how the chassis reacts to asymmetric kerb impacts are evident. The pole-sitter is able to attack this section more easily on entry and hold a tighter line on exit.
Indeed, through corner exits, the micro-sectors light up in papaya. Finally, the double left at the end—the two Rivazzas—is decisive for closing the lap: Charles Leclerc arrives at Rivazza 1 with good speed but pays the price on turn-in, a sign that the car isn’t fully supporting him in rotation and that the downhill deceleration phase isn’t optimal. Oscar Piastri puts together a clean line, which allows him to get on the throttle earlier and power through to the finish.
The SF-25 can’t perform in qualifying conditions, especially on new tyres: it lacks the perfect combination of setup, driver confidence, and clean driving that is currently rewarding the MCL39. The race is expected to be long and above all tactical: the FP2 race pace was rather competitive and could help in recovery. That’s the goal for Ferrari, aiming to put things right in front of its home fans.
Leave a Reply