Ferrari’s latest SF-26 upgrades have delivered an encouraging start to the 2026 United States Grand Prix, with Charles Leclerc finishing fastest in both opening practice sessions at the Circuit of The Americas. The new aerodynamic package, featuring changes to the floor, sidepods and diffuser, appears to be working as intended. However, the crucial question remains unanswered: how much performance has Ferrari actually gained from the updates?
The revised floor and associated aerodynamic changes could represent a meaningful step forward for the Scuderia, but they could also prove to be a relatively modest evolution. Despite Charles Leclerc’s impressive Friday pace, there is not yet enough evidence to determine how much of Ferrari’s improved competitiveness comes from the new components and how much can be attributed to the car’s setup and operating conditions.
Ferrari’s Austin upgrades: what has changed on the SF-26?
Ferrari has introduced an aerodynamic upgrade package at Austin targeting several of the SF-26’s most important areas. The main focus is on the floor, sidepods and diffuser, three closely connected components responsible for managing airflow towards and around the rear of the car.
The floor is the central element of the development programme. Its primary function is to generate aerodynamic downforce by controlling airflow beneath the car while maintaining stable performance as ride height and suspension settings change. Improvements in this area can be particularly valuable because the underfloor aerodynamic platform is sensitive to variations in the car’s distance from the track surface.
The revised sidepods and diffuser complement these changes, with the objective of improving how the different aerodynamic surfaces interact. The aim is not necessarily to produce the largest possible increase in peak downforce, but to make the overall aerodynamic package more effective and predictable across different operating conditions.
An upgrade does not have to deliver a dramatic increase in maximum downforce to be useful. Improvements may instead come through greater aerodynamic stability, reduced sensitivity to ride-height changes or a broader operating window. These characteristics can influence driver confidence and help maintain a consistent balance throughout a lap.
Ferrari’s opening practice performance has already provided some indications of how the changes could affect the car. The early findings are explored further in our Ferrari Austin FP1 technical analysis, which examines the SF-26’s aerodynamic characteristics and straight-line performance.
Charles Leclerc plays down Ferrari’s upgrades: caution or limited gains?
Charles Leclerc’s assessment of the new Ferrari package was one of the most interesting developments to emerge from Friday’s running at Austin. The Monegasque explained that the upgrades had performed in line with expectations, while also cautioning against building excessive expectations around their potential.
That assessment leaves two possible interpretations. Ferrari may have introduced an evolution that provides only a relatively small performance improvement, or the changes may have primarily enhanced the overall behaviour of the SF-26 without producing an immediately measurable gain in outright lap time. The two possibilities are not mutually exclusive.
In Formula 1, an upgrade can be effective without fundamentally transforming a car’s competitiveness. Its value also depends on how well it integrates with the existing aerodynamic components and whether it allows engineers to operate the car within a more favourable setup window.
The real question is therefore how much of Charles Leclerc’s Friday performance can be attributed to the new aerodynamic package and how much comes from the balance Ferrari has managed to achieve at the Circuit of The Americas. For now, there is insufficient evidence to quantify the aerodynamic improvement with precision.
Ferrari FP1 and FP2: Charles Leclerc fastest as Lewis Hamilton struggles
Ferrari’s Friday programme included a direct comparison between the old and new specifications during the opening practice session. Charles Leclerc ran the upgraded aerodynamic package in FP1, while Lewis Hamilton used the previous configuration. Both drivers then switched to the updated specification for FP2.
This approach allowed the team to gather information on the two configurations before continuing its evaluation with both cars running the latest components. The reasoning behind the experiment is examined in our analysis of Ferrari’s improving competitiveness following Charles Leclerc’s Austin FP2 benchmark.
Charles Leclerc finished at the top of the timesheets in both sessions, confirming that the SF-26 was capable of delivering strong single-lap performance. The results were particularly encouraging given the importance of assessing the new parts against Ferrari’s closest competitors.
Lewis Hamilton, meanwhile, experienced greater difficulty finding a suitable balance. The seven-time world champion was particularly uncomfortable with how the car behaved over the bumps at the Austin circuit, which complicated his attempts to extract its full potential.
However, the performance difference between the two Ferrari drivers needs to be interpreted carefully. The gap on the timesheets does not establish that the upgrade works better on Charles Leclerc’s car. Setup choices, tyre behaviour and each driver’s ability to exploit the machinery can all significantly influence lap times.
The encouraging aspect for Ferrari is that both drivers continued working with the updated specification in FP2. Nevertheless, the contribution of the new components to the recorded lap times remains difficult to establish.
Mercedes and Red Bull: is Ferrari really the fastest team in Austin?
The FP2 classification provided positive indications for Maranello, but it is still too early to establish the competitive order ahead of qualifying. Charles Leclerc’s benchmark was impressive, although Mercedes and Red Bull remained close enough to suggest that the fight at the front is far from settled.
Kimi Antonelli finished just 0.042 seconds behind Charles Leclerc, while Max Verstappen ended the session 0.189 seconds away from the Ferrari driver. Those small margins underline how closely matched the leading contenders appeared during Friday’s running.
Power-unit management could also change the competitive picture. During free practice, Formula 1 teams regularly follow different programmes involving power delivery, energy management, fuel loads and lap preparation. These differences can have a considerable effect on the times recorded.
Consequently, the practice classification alone cannot establish whether Mercedes still has additional performance available for qualifying or precisely how Ferrari compares with its rivals when all three teams are operating under equivalent conditions.
Straight-line performance and the SF-26’s behaviour through high-speed corners will be important areas to assess. Equally significant will be each team’s ability to bring the tyres into their ideal operating window and maintain that performance throughout a qualifying lap.
The wider picture will become clearer as the weekend progresses, particularly when the teams begin running more representative qualifying programmes. Ferrari’s pace remains encouraging, but the narrow differences between Charles Leclerc, Kimi Antonelli and Max Verstappen make definitive conclusions premature.
Could Ferrari’s new floor also improve race pace?
The true value of Ferrari’s Austin upgrade package cannot be measured solely by the fastest lap achieved during free practice. A significant part of its potential could lie in how consistently the SF-26 behaves over longer runs and across different phases of a corner.
If the updated floor makes the car less sensitive to changes in ride height and improves aerodynamic stability during corner entry, mid-corner and exit, Ferrari could also benefit in race conditions. A more predictable aerodynamic platform can help drivers maintain consistent handling while allowing engineers to explore more effective setup solutions.
That does not automatically mean the SF-26 will manage its tyres more effectively. Any improvement in tyre behaviour will need to be assessed through comparable long-run data and by considering the programmes followed by Ferrari’s competitors.
Austin is an especially demanding test of these characteristics because the circuit combines high-speed corners, rapid changes of direction and numerous bumps. These features place significant demands on aerodynamic stability and the car’s ability to maintain a predictable balance over varying track surfaces.
The importance of these comparisons can be explored through the ScuderiaFans F1 practice and long-run analysis, which provides a way to examine practice performance and compare relevant stint data across the field.
Without directly comparable race-pace information, and without knowing the precise operating conditions of the other cars, it would be premature to conclude that Ferrari’s new package has delivered a definite improvement in tyre management.
Ferrari’s Austin package works, but how much performance has it really added?
After the first two practice sessions of the United States Grand Prix, Ferrari has legitimate reasons to feel encouraged. Charles Leclerc has demonstrated that the SF-26 is competitive over a single lap, and the driver has confirmed that the new aerodynamic components are functioning in line with expectations.
However, that does not amount to proof that Ferrari has achieved a substantial performance breakthrough. The upgrades appear to be working, but their actual contribution to the car’s competitiveness remains uncertain.
Charles Leclerc’s cautious assessment could reflect a desire to keep expectations under control, but it could equally represent a realistic evaluation of an upgrade that delivers useful improvements without fundamentally changing the performance hierarchy.
Qualifying will offer a clearer indication of the SF-26’s outright single-lap potential, while the Grand Prix should provide valuable information about balance consistency, tyre behaviour and whether the new aerodynamic configuration offers benefits over a race distance.
For now, the most important conclusion from Ferrari’s Friday running in Austin is that the new package appears to be functioning as intended. Its precise performance value, however, has still not been established. Charles Leclerc’s pace provides an encouraging foundation for continued development, but there is not yet sufficient evidence to determine how much closer the SF-26 has moved towards its main rivals.
Leave a Reply