Ferrari spent Azerbaijan Grand Prix FP1 working through two key areas on the SF-26: finding the right setup for the demanding Baku City Circuit and improving hybrid energy deployment after clipping became visible in comparison with Mercedes. Charles Leclerc and Lewis Hamilton also focused on reducing traction oversteer, while the consistency shown during the longer runs provided an encouraging foundation ahead of further fine-tuning.
The opening session therefore offered more than the headline positions on the timing screens. Ferrari finished third with Charles Leclerc and fourth with Lewis Hamilton on medium tyres, but the most important work centred on understanding how the SF-26 behaves through Baku’s slow corners and how effectively the power unit can sustain electrical assistance across the circuit’s demanding acceleration zones.
Ferrari SF-26 setup work focuses on deployment and handling in Baku FP1
Ferrari waited around 20 minutes before sending both cars onto the track, with Charles Leclerc and Lewis Hamilton leaving the pit lane on Pirelli’s hard tyres. It was a familiar Formula 1 approach aimed at establishing and refining the SF-26’s baseline setup using a compound capable of delivering relatively consistent performance.
The Baku surface is typically dirty at the beginning of a weekend and takes time to rubber in, which also encouraged a cautious approach on the throttle during the opening phase. With the hardest compound available, keeping the front axle inside the correct temperature window was not straightforward.
That is an area Ferrari must manage carefully, having already encountered similar characteristics at circuits such as Monza and Madrid. The team therefore concentrated heavily on handling, while also conducting tests on the mapping used to control the hybrid element of the power unit. Brake settings were another important part of the programme.
Finding the ideal braking point and the correct approach to each braking zone is particularly difficult in Azerbaijan. Ferrari also made several differential adjustments in an effort to improve the SF-26’s rotation in the sections where traction on corner exit becomes decisive.
Turns 1 and 7, together with the final corner before the long high-speed section towards the finish line, emerged as specific areas where the two Ferraris needed improvement. Achieving the right compromise between rotation on entry and stability under acceleration remains one of the central setup challenges around Baku.
The first runs nevertheless produced broadly positive feedback. Neither Charles Leclerc nor Lewis Hamilton appeared completely satisfied with the car, but their radio comments suggested that both regarded the underlying setup as a good starting point. The feeling was that the SF-26’s operating window could still be improved considerably as the session progressed.
The opening stint ended with several practice starts before both cars returned to the garage for further adjustments.
Ferrari sees up to 10 km/h deficit as Mercedes deployment stands out
The second run was completed on the medium tyre, another relatively consistent compound but one offering a noticeably higher level of grip. Comparing Ferrari with its direct rivals highlighted one of the most significant technical differences of the session: the SF-26’s top speed was lower than Mercedes’ in several areas of the circuit.
The gap reached as much as 10 km/h at certain points, including the section between Turns 5 and 6. The difference underlined the effectiveness of the energy deployment available to the two Mercedes W17s and fitted with the wider challenge Ferrari already expected to face from Baku’s demanding hybrid-energy requirements.
This was not an entirely new picture given Mercedes’ current advantage over Ferrari in this area of power-unit performance. The distinction is particularly important under the 2026 regulations, where the ability to sustain electrical assistance throughout an acceleration phase can matter as much as the final speed recorded at the end of a straight. The wider technical background to the difference is explored in the analysis of Ferrari and Mercedes power-unit deployment.
Through the slower and more technical sections, however, the two cars appeared considerably closer. The SF-26 continues to show good mechanical characteristics in these areas and is capable of exploiting them effectively when rotation and traction are under control.
Clipping near Turn 15 exposes Ferrari’s energy limitation
The difference became especially visible approaching Turn 15. Ferrari appeared to have less electrical energy available to deploy than Mercedes at that stage of the lap, a trend also reflected by a higher degree of super-clipping.
Clipping occurs when the electrical contribution begins to reduce before the end of an acceleration zone, leaving the car with less combined power available for the final part of the straight. In Ferrari’s case, some performance was being lost as a result, although the deficit did not appear overwhelming during FP1.
Baku is especially demanding in this respect because the team must distribute the available electrical energy across several acceleration zones rather than simply concentrate on outright top speed. The differences recorded through these areas can be followed through the ScuderiaFans F1 Top Speed Comparison, although the key issue for Ferrari is how long deployment can be sustained rather than the maximum number alone.
Traction oversteer remains another SF-26 setup priority
Handling remains equally important if Ferrari is to extract the SF-26’s full potential. The car showed a certain tendency towards excessive rotation during FP1. In principle, a responsive rear end can help the driver turn the car effectively, but only when the movement remains controlled.
At this stage, that balance had not yet been fully achieved. The oversteer was restricting traction on corner exit, meaning Charles Leclerc and Lewis Hamilton could not always apply the throttle as efficiently as they wanted. That is particularly costly at Baku, where several slow corners lead directly into important acceleration phases.
The task for Ferrari is therefore to preserve enough rotation to negotiate the tight sections without allowing the rear axle to become too lively when the drivers return to the power. Differential settings, brake balance and the wider mechanical setup all form part of that compromise.
Ferrari long-run consistency provides encouraging FP1 foundation
One of the more positive elements of Ferrari’s session was the consistency shown by both cars during the higher-fuel runs. The SF-26 maintained a relatively stable level of performance across the stints, giving the engineers a useful platform from which to work.
That consistency does not yet establish Ferrari’s true competitive position. The Maranello cars have frequently demonstrated significant underlying potential during the season, but converting that potential into the maximum available performance has not always been straightforward.
After only FP1, it therefore remains difficult to establish the real hierarchy, particularly because Baku’s characteristics differ substantially from those of the previous two circuits. Different fuel loads, tyre programmes and energy-management strategies also complicate direct comparisons in opening practice.
The next step for Ferrari is a detailed review of the data before FP2, with the focus on narrowing the setup direction, improving traction and refining hybrid deployment. The team’s longer-run work can be compared as the weekend develops through the ScuderiaFans F1 Practice & Long-Run Analysis.
The objective is to bring those areas together into a more complete SF-26 package. Ferrari has a stable long-run base to build from, but Baku FP1 also made clear that reducing oversteer and extracting electrical energy more efficiently will be central to the fine-tuning process before qualifying. The remaining session times for the weekend are available in the 2026 Azerbaijan Grand Prix schedule.
Leave a Reply