McLaren won the Constructors’ Championship, and Ferrari, by contrast, lost it. This happened during the 2024 Formula 1 racing season. The reason is quite clear unfortunately, considering the Maranello team’s mistakes. We have reiterated this exhaustively, we must admit, in several articles dedicated to the Italian team for many months now. The issue remains the same and revolves around the inability of the technical team led by Italian aerodynamicist Enrico Cardile, the former technical director of the Maranello squad, to produce effective aerodynamic package. And by now it is a well-know fact that the Spanish Grand Prix was unfortunately the beginning of the disaster that crippled the Prancing Horse.
The Italian side introduced a new version of the medium-to-high downforce rear wing. But the most important innovation was undoubtedly the floor, a crucial macro-component for generating aerodynamic load. When such an element is introduced on a car competing in the most important category of motorsport, it requires effective on-track validation. Indeed, it is not at all simple to immediately determine whether the studies conducted at the factory, between simulator and wind tunnel, have truly resulted in a tangible improvement. For this reason, at the Circuit de Catalunya in Barcelona, the verdict remained undecided.
However, between the Austrian Grand Prix and the race weekend in Great Britain, the answers came loud and clear. The new floor of the SF-24 did not work as intended. It generated considerable instability in terms of handling, eliminating the feature of the Ferrari that drivers appreciated most: its predictability. There was significant bouncing and, generally speaking, great difficulty in utilizing the proper ride heights. At the Hungarian Grand Prix, a “quick fix” was introduced by the Maranello team’s technicians and engineers, which was in fact a preliminary modification to make this component more manageable while waiting for an entirely new floor, which would only arrive in Italy for the home race at the Monza circuit.
In the meantime, six races where the SF-24 showcased all its limitations. Competitive scenarios in which Charles Leclerc and Carlos Sainz were forced into constant adaptation, yielding no positive results. During this part of the 2024 Formula 1 season, Ferrari lost its chance to win the Constructors’ Championship. Furthermore, considering Charles Leclerc’s final gap of 81 points to Max Verstappen, the idea that the Monegasque could have competed for the Drivers’ Championship is not far-fetched at all. There is also another issue weighing on the Constructors’ results, where the final margin was much smaller, namely could Ferrari have won the Constructors’ without McLaren’s Mini DRS?
What we are referring to is closely inked to the disputes regarding McLaren’s legality. This brings us back to the discussion about the rear wing. A sort of “mini drag reduction system,” with which the MCL38 could maintain a downforce level similar to Ferrari’s but enjoy a clear advantage in high-speed sections. Essentially, drag was reduced thanks to a particular aeroelasticity of the element, which would slightly open on straights even with the drag reduction system closed. This advantage was estimated at a top speed gain of at least 3 or 4 kilometers per hour, which is clearly not insignificant at all.
Within this scenario, there are two interrelated issues that raise concerns and not just for Ferrari. The first involves the FIA’s attitude following Red Bull’s report. To start with, if the Milton Keynes team had not filed a complaint, the MCL38 would have continued using the disputed wing until the end of the 2024 Formula 1 championship. This highlights the inadequacy of the legislative body, which makes the rules but is absolutely incapable of enforcing them. Moreover, once the questionable legality was established, the International Federation did not penalize McLaren.
Instead, it politely invited the Woking team to retire the specific component. Furthermore, through its technical director, former Ferrari engineer Nicholas Tombazis, it stated that certain past cases could not be verified and therefore immediately closed the matter. Sweeping the issue under the rug, essentially. This is the FIA’s approach. Creating such a precedent is highly risky in Formula 1. Why? Because a team that goes unpunished sets an example for others, which, in turn, will feel entitled to employ borderline or outright illegal solutions, knowing they will face no consequences.
However, in our view, the most serious matter concerns the second issue that surfaced with the amendment to the technical regulations for next year. The regulatory body introduced a change that seems tailor-made to prevent a similar or identical solution to that used by McLaren from being replicated. Starting in 2025, the flap of the movable wing must adhere to the same deformation restrictions as the rest of the bodywork when the drag reduction system is inactive. To be even clearer, the regulatory body added a clause via Article 3.10.10.
There must be a mandatory minimum distance between the two elements of the rear wing when the drag reduction system is not active. Across the wingspan, the rear-end profiles must maintain a minimum distance between 9.4 and 13 millimeters. This parameter will be enforced when the system is inactive, with FIA inspections using a calibrated spherical tool to ensure full compliance before official sessions. At this point, a question arises and gives us much to think about regarding the matter.
Why does the FIA “ban” McLaren’s solution, thus deeming it illegal, yet during the championship chose to overlook it and not penalize a team that derived clear benefits? Is this the standard procedure? Can we talk about a skewed championship? Just in the Azerbaijan Grand Prix at the Baku city circuit, where the MCL38’s “Mini DRS” made the difference, if we subtract 7 points from Oscar Piastri (who finished first) and add them to Charles Leclerc, second at the finish, the two teams would have tied with 659 points. Moreover, Ferrari would have had one more victory. But unfortunately, retroactive penalties do not exist.
— see video above —
Leave a Reply