Ferrari’s ADUO-2 power unit delivered a measurable improvement to the SF-26 at the Spanish Grand Prix in Madrid, but the comparison between Lewis Hamilton and Charles Leclerc also highlighted a problem that remains unresolved: the internal combustion engine still lacks power relative to the strongest benchmarks on the 2026 Formula 1 grid.
Ferrari finds itself in an increasingly uncomfortable position after Madrid. The Scuderia remains a long way behind Constructors’ Championship leader Mercedes, while McLaren is closing rapidly. Consolidating second place is therefore becoming the minimum objective, yet despite the latest updates the SF-26 continues to lack one fundamental ingredient: sufficient power from the thermal side of the power unit.
Ferrari ADUO-2 power unit: what Madrid revealed
Lewis Hamilton’s SF-26 ran the updated ADUO-2 specification in Madrid, while Charles Leclerc did not have the newer internal combustion engine. Ferrari opted against fitting it to the Monegasque’s car because of reliability concerns following his accident at Monza one week earlier.
Although the two Ferraris were relatively close in overall pace, the data indicates that the updated engine genuinely improved performance, contrary to suggestions that ADUO-2 had delivered little or no benefit. The comparison fits into the wider picture of Ferrari’s Spanish Grand Prix technical performance at Madring, where several different strengths and weaknesses of the SF-26 emerged over the weekend.
The problem is that Ferrari’s thermal engine is still not powerful enough, at least when compared with the power units that have established themselves as the reference point so far this season.
Lewis Hamilton gained around two tenths with the updated Ferrari engine
The Madrid circuit showed that Lewis Hamilton’s SF-26 was gaining an average of around two tenths of a second compared with Charles Leclerc’s car without the updated engine specification. That represents a significant advantage and can clearly be considered a genuine step forward.
The qualifying times were nevertheless very similar because Charles Leclerc produced an exceptional lap, recovering much of the disadvantage in the third sector. The comparison therefore suggests that ADUO-2 has improved Ferrari’s performance even if the final qualifying classification did not fully reflect the difference between the two engine specifications.
The main weakness remains outright power. Lewis Hamilton’s retirement makes a complete race-pace comparison between the Ferrari drivers impossible, but the qualifying data and the opening laps on Sunday still provide enough information to identify the problem.
On the uphill section between Turns 6 and 7, the two Ferrari drivers lost roughly two tenths on average to the Red Bull-Ford and Mercedes power units over a distance of only around 300 metres. A deficit of that size over such a short acceleration zone is extremely difficult to recover completely through the more technical sections of a lap.
The broader performance gap can also be considered through ScuderiaFans’ Ferrari vs F1 rivals statistics, particularly as Mercedes and McLaren continue to define the level Ferrari is attempting to reach.
Ferrari has no further 2026 power unit upgrades planned
The outlook becomes more difficult because Ferrari is not expected to introduce any further power unit developments this season, while Mercedes can still bring additional improvements to its internal combustion engine. The next significant Ferrari upgrade is instead expected to be a new floor, currently planned for Austin unless there is a major change of direction.
That leaves little room to address the engine deficit directly before the end of the championship. It also adds to the difficult questions surrounding the remaining development path of the SF-26. From a power unit perspective, much of Ferrari’s 2026 story now appears to have already been written.
Ferrari’s 2026 problems are becoming more complicated
The lack of combustion-engine power is set to remain an important weakness until the end of the season, but it is not the only concern Ferrari must consider. The SF-26’s strongest area, its chassis, is also beginning to come under greater pressure from its rivals.
The Ferrari remains unquestionably competitive in slow corners, but McLaren’s latest updates have taken the MCL40 to an impressive level, particularly through medium- and high-speed corners. Mercedes, meanwhile, remains exceptionally strong when attacking kerbs, an important characteristic at circuits such as Madrid.
That contrast was particularly visible at Madring, where Ferrari adopted a mechanical compromise that worked well in some areas but created difficulties elsewhere. The effect of that configuration is explored in greater detail in the analysis of Ferrari’s stiff SF-26 setup at Madrid.
The planned floor update could allow Ferrari to become a reference in medium- and low-speed corners and in tyre management, which remains one of the car’s strengths. Even so, the lack of engine power will inevitably continue to be felt.
Ferrari’s hope is that the deficit can be compensated for through the electrical side of the power unit, although that is another area in which the Mercedes-powered cars have proved particularly strong. Mercedes’ overall technical level in 2026 can also be seen in the development of the Mercedes W17 and its performance advantage.
Ferrari may now have to focus on defending second place
Returning to winning form during the remainder of the 2026 season is becoming increasingly difficult for Ferrari. Madrid provided the first major indication that the Scuderia may now need to accept its situation and concentrate on defending its position in the Constructors’ Championship as effectively as possible.
With the drivers’ championship ambitions now effectively gone and no further power unit upgrades expected, Ferrari’s challenge is to extract as much as possible from the SF-26 through chassis development, tyre management and the electrical side of the power unit. ADUO-2 has delivered a genuine improvement, but Madrid also demonstrated that the step was not large enough to eliminate the underlying performance deficit.
Leave a Reply