During the second free practice session of the Singapore Grand Prix, Ferrari faced a difficult challenge as Charles Leclerc ended only ninth, 0.752s behind Oscar Piastri’s benchmark time. The session confirmed what was already visible on track: the SF-25 continues to struggle to adapt to the evening conditions of Marina Bay, particularly in tyre management and mid-corner balance.
A tricky direction for the tyres
Already from FP1, it was clear that Ferrari still needed to work on the car’s balance. The front end of Charles Leclerc’s car was precise in direction changes but often too aggressive, forcing the Monegasque driver to make small corrections to hit the apex properly. In FP2, the situation worsened. The car became nervous and unpredictable, requiring constant steering corrections on corner entry.
The most problematic area was the middle sector, between turns 7 and 13, where most of the traction zones are located. In that section alone, Leclerc lost around two tenths to Piastri. The McLaren was able to deploy power more progressively and cleanly, keeping the tyres within their optimal temperature window. The SF-25, by contrast, suffered from excessive rear wheel slip.
The main issue, once again, was tyre performance. The tyres overheated quickly, lost grip, and reduced stability. Telemetry data confirmed slower acceleration and a lower full-throttle usage by 2.7 percentage points — a huge deficit on a circuit where traction is the key. This issue also affected the third sector, with Leclerc losing almost half a second, including 0.372s in turn 14 alone.
Ferrari: instability and poor traction, once again caused by tyres
Telemetry shows that through turn 14, Leclerc carried 8 km/h less speed than his rivals, with most of the gap opening on corner exit, where he had to delay applying full throttle to avoid wheelspin. Under braking, however, the SF-25 seemed more competitive, as shown by the car’s performance in the first two corners. In this phase, Charles Leclerc gained time by keeping a small percentage of braking pressure to maintain front-end grip.
Compared to McLaren, Ferrari gained about 0.250s in this section, which later dropped to 0.113s after turn 3. In the first sector, therefore, the tyres seemed to work reasonably well, as the car faced less traction stress. To protect the rear end — highly sensitive to temperature — Ferrari set the brake balance unusually forward, at around 60%, a detail that could be spotted on the steering wheel display.
This was an unconventional choice but absolutely necessary under these conditions. However, the setup was far from ideal in certain corners, such as turn 13, where braking from 220 km/h created significant instability under downshifting. That section exposed Ferrari’s weakness, as Leclerc often ran slightly long due to small front-locking incidents.
SF-25: losing eight tenths due to tyres
Telemetry data makes it clear that Oscar Piastri’s advantage came from a smooth and consistent driving style, allowing him to fully exploit the mechanical grip of the McLaren. His steering inputs were cleaner, corner entries more linear, and traction phases more progressive. By contrast, Charles Leclerc had to wrestle the car, managing excessive rear instability, especially in sections where trust in the rear end is crucial.
In summary, FP2 in Singapore exposed a fundamental weakness for Ferrari: the inability to maintain the correct tyre temperature throughout the lap, particularly at the rear. The result was a nervous and unpredictable SF-25, far from the promising car seen in FP1. With Charles Leclerc finishing ninth, nearly eight tenths behind Piastri’s leading time, Ferrari faced a major setup challenge heading into qualifying.
Leave a Reply